Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)
Date
Msg-id 24518.1264443863@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: 
>> It might be better to try a test case with lighter-weight objects,
>> say 5 million simple functions.
> Said dump ran in about 45 minutes with no obvious stalls or
> problems.  The 2.2 GB database dumped to a 1.1 GB text file, which
> was a little bit of a surprise.

Did you happen to notice anything about pg_dump's memory consumption?
For an all-DDL case like this, I'd sort of expect the memory usage to
be comparable to the output file size.

Anyway this seems to suggest that we don't have any huge problem with
large numbers of archive TOC objects, so the next step probably is to
look at how big a code change it would be to switch over to
TOC-per-blob.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: MySQL-ism help patch for psql
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Fwd: Questions about connection clean-up and "invalid page header"